Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Silicoln-based

8 (80%)

Hydrogen based

2 (20%)

Total Members Voted: 10

[GreatWyrmGold]

Why don't you want creatures that drink and piss mana?

Because it would be extremely costly to put pure mana in the seas, and would not have any point?

You see, the problem is currently we are on a path to create an exact replica of Earth. This place has to have SOME quirks, or some oddity so we aren't playing God that just felt like creating the planet we live on currently.

I don't follow your logic. We already made silicon-based life, and we haven't even gotten past bacteria. As long as you don't try making wingless flying dragons or natural golems or something, I'll be behind whatever squamous life-forms you guys propose.

I'm agreeing with GreatWyrmGold (and thus, acually, with myself) but hydrocarbon seas are good.

We already have main differences: silicon based life and seas of hydrocarbons help make it a bit different. We can make more advanced living things with mana, but the idea of making the basic bits need mana does feel wasteful and little gain for the cost.

Could we make it hydrosilicates instead? Hydrocarbons and silicon-based life don't really jibe well.

That's all well and good but the silicon based life could easily evolve to be humanoids which dominate the planet through their ingenuity and intelligence.

Well, aren't we an intelligent designer? We can intelligently design other life!
Or, we could intelligently design humanoids. That would be pretty different from Earth.

Yeah multiple races is funnier, more politics that make some sense as people are going against actual races instead of themselves.

I'm not even interested in amusement, I'm just looking to expend my creativity on something, so we can build something unusual, creative, unnatural. And by that, I mean it should not have to be governed by the laws that govern the organics we know today.

Define "laws that govern the organics we know today," please.

[Icefire2314]

I could've been more descriptive with "Chemistry" in general. For example, it has been repeatedly said that Argon, for example, cannot be used for the organic composition of any creature due to its being a noble gas. My question is, who cares? It's a game, in which we are in an alternate universe, in which we layout our own laws, because in this universe we are God. So why should we be limited by the fact that Argon is a noble gas and can't react?

[GreatWyrmGold]

Why shouldn't we?

[Gamerlord]

Because your say-so isn't the be all and end all.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Don't go attacking me. What point is there in making argon-based life if it essentially works the same way as it would if it was based on something else? It's different for the sake of being different, and it isn't even an interesting kind of different.

[Gamerlord]

It isn't interesting to you. Stop assuming that everyone else feels the same way as you.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Alright. What makes being able to say "This life is argon-based!" interesting? Is it in any practical way different from non-argon-based life, or is it just different to be different?

[Gamerlord]

And theres the problem. You feel as though we need to justify our suggestions, our choices to you. If everyone votes for something, it will be implemented. If they don't, it won't. So stop going off at everyone else.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I'm sorry for asking you guys to put a little thought into your suggestions.

If in any other suggestion game--let's pick TWoOtA for a pretty well-known example--aren't you expected to be able to explain your choices? If I suggested that Ciro strip naked and dance, how do you think the other players would react? (Past "Who hacked GWG's account?"/"What happened to GWG?"/"You might want to change your slogan, GWG"/etc, of course.) They would ask me why I would want to do such a thing. Less absurdly, when I suggested we jump down the shaft, I had to explain that choice. The other people, who wanted to fight the dragon or look for other exits, had to explain their choices. In any suggestion game with lots of people, debates pop up, and people are expected to be able to explain why they chose what they chose. Why is this suggestion game any different?

[Gamerlord]

Because you do nothing but attack other people's suggestions and refuse to see the disadvantages/cons of your own.

[GreatWyrmGold]

That's because no one ever points them out. If you think my ideas are so horrible, say why. Just like any other suggestion game.

[Gamerlord]

That's because no one ever points them out. If you think my ideas are so horrible, say why. Just like any other suggestion game.

We've all pointed it out again and again. Your ideas are so similar to life, they're boring. That may be blunter and harsher than how others put it, but I really feel that in order to get this game rolling, this needs to be drilled into your skull.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Again: Why does "carbon-based life" immediately transfer to "exactly like Earth life"? There is (would be, whatever) no reason for our carbon-based life to exactly resemble the carbon-based life of Earth. There is no reason the argon-based life you propose would not resemble the carbon-based life of Earth, if you're throwing out the laws of physics just so you can have carbon-based life. In the end, it's just different for the sake of being different. Is having a little note in the spoiler of "All life on X is argon-based" really that interesting?

[The Froggy Ninja]

Bump

[The Froggy Ninja]

You know what why not just have oceans made of molten iron.